Let us make four very clear statements from the start: First, that there is a dominant, consistently revolutionary and national transformation ideological line – in the Movement. Second, that that line is led by President Yoweri K. Museveni – he is the National Chairperson of the NRM, and President of Uganda. Third, that that the line is responsible – challenges notwithstanding – for bringing Uganda to the threshold of national take-off. Fourth, that that line shall positively define Uganda’s national development trajectory over the next few decades.
Our 14th December 2020 piece, “Challengers’ Manifestos Have Absolutely No Ideological Anchoring”, evoked numerous, favourable responses from the readers. But, it also evoked some interesting questions. Today’s piece is in answer to some of the questions which were raised.
Joseph Mawululu observed that we dwell “so much on theories of deceitful government”, while the people ask simple questions about “roads and medicine”.
Stephen Sserwada asked what the ideology of the NRM is. He asked, is it, “liberalism, capitalist, communist, socialist …”
Our young sister Sussie from Congress, asked whether “Ugandans eat ideology” …
This time round Moses, our friend from academia who is always scathingly personal, did not post anything …
Anyway, let us repeat what we stated then about the critical and central importance of ideology. It cannot be overemphasized.
“Why are we raising the red flag on the category “Ideology” yet again? Why shall we do this again and again? It is because “ideology” refers very simply but clearly to a systematic, coherent and consistent world-view – with a compelling internal logic. Normally and very important, “Ideology” is reflective of definite socio-economic interests. “Ideology” therefore, cannot refer to random, sporadic thought. A clear ideological identity defines clear purpose, clear programs of work – in the short term, and over the medium to long terms”.
Our dear friends (Joseph, Stephen, Sussie, Moses and the others), should take note that issues of ensuring that wananchi have bread and butter, food, medicine, clothing, housing, security, etc – are all issues of management of society. When we deal with management of society, we are dealing with questions of ideology – as defined immediately above. There is no way anybody seriously interested in the well-being and forward advancement of society can avoid ideology – or the lack of it. This is so – whether we like one another or we do not. This is so – irrespective of our political persuasions.
What usually confuses all of us, is that the political formations we have in countries like Uganda are not political parties in the strict classical sense. Political parties in the strict classical sense, are organized around distinct socio-economic interests, around distinct ideological lines, around principled differences. They evolve and grow. They do not fall “ready-made” like manna from heaven.
This therefore, objectively and in a world historical sense, is not yet the era of politics organized around political parties. It is the age of politics organized around broad movements or fronts, etc – representative of a katogo or diversity of socio-economic interests. Our political formations today, without exception, are largely peasant formations – they are all stamped with the birthmarks of the peasant origins of their membership. These include localism, provincialism, parochialism, sectarianism … To emphasize, our largely peasant political formations are not yet strictly political parties – whatever exterior forms of organization they take on.
In comparison, the modern political party in Europe and North America finally appeared and was consolidated as recently as in the 19th Century! The modern political party appeared together with the appearance of industrialization, a young revolutionary capitalism, and the dismantling of subsistence agriculture … It appeared on the back of the broad movements against feudal absolutism … It appeared on the back of the broad movements against colonialism and for national independence … It appeared on the broad movements against slavery … It appeared on the back of the broad movements for national unification …
In the meantime, the leaders of our largely peasant formations (their pretensions to the contrary notwithstanding) are faced with a serious dilemma. Are they able to provide leadership based on more than social psychology, that is, on more than everyday experience? Are the leaders able to deliberately and conscientiously study our political economy – and contribute to the emergence of a nationalizing ideology for liberation and transformation? Only an ideologically clear leadership will appreciate the long and phased journey for national transformation – and the necessary national tasks in each phase!
Stephen Sserwada asks about ‘capitalist’ ideology – yet, he has a very young and small capitalist base in the enclave economy! He has virtually no capitalist or bourgeois class to massively reorganize Agriculture, Industry and Services! He asks about ‘socialist’ ideology – yet, he has no capitalist means of production for him to nationalize, no advanced classes of working people to drive a socialist agenda … He asks about ‘communist ideology’! You cannot have Communism without communists … You cannot have communists without a communist party …
No, Mr. Sserwada. The particular ‘isms’ you mention cannot provide the nationalizing ideology in our specific circumstances – in our peasant subsistence enclave economies and incomplete national and statal mutation.
Let us quote from our March 2019 presentation (titled Challenges of Organization Development in a Mass Movement: Lessons from Comparative Study) at the National Leadership Institute, Kyankwanzi: “Let us now return to the national liberation movement. In January 1940, Mao Zedong wrote his seminal work ‘On New Democracy’.
To paraphrase Mao in ‘On New Democracy’, in the colonies and former colonies, ‘revolutions of a new type – new democratic revolutions’ – were going to take place … ‘neither in favour of Capitalism, nor Socialism’.
Years later, several African leaders and revolutionaries echoed that last sentence both in theory and practice – in the specificities of their people’s struggles. Yoweri Museveni summarized it thus: ‘The NRM is neither pro-West nor pro-East – it’s pro-Uganda’. John Garang de Mabior opined, ‘We are neither pro-West nor pro-East. We are pro-Africa’.
The African National Congress enriched this discourse by further developing the theory of ‘National Democratic Revolution’, reflecting it in the Freedom Charter. Etc.
Back to Mao and ‘On New Democracy’. He went on to speak about ‘new democratic government’ being established by what he called a ‘joint democratic dictatorship of all revolutionary classes’. He remarked, ‘The present task of the revolution in China is to fight imperialism and feudalism, and socialism is out of the question until this task is completed. The Chinese revolution cannot avoid taking the two steps, first of New Democracy and then of Socialism. Moreover, the first step will need quite a long time’.
The national liberation movement, is a global movement. It started between the two world wars. It is a movement for self-determination and national independence of the emergent peoples of the world, for justice and social progress.
In this sense, the national liberation movement is a broad front or coalition of forces, united for national liberation. It cannot, therefore, be said to be strictly uni-ideological like the classical political party. Still, there is always a dominant political line. In the case of the NRM, this is encapsulated in the principles and elements of Patriotism, Pan Africanism, Socio-Economic Transformation and Democracy”.
Let us conclude by flagging concepts and elements relevant to this conversation, extracted from President Yoweri K. Museveni’s address to the Extraordinary Meeting of the Third National Conference of the NRM, in August this year. This is very important because the Address, adopted by the National Conference as an NRM Strategic Working Document, was the basis for the NRM Manifesto 2021 Elections.
The head-on collision between pre-colonial and pre-Capitalist Africa with colonialism and global capitalism: “With the conquest of Africa, this system was violently overthrown by colonialism and Africans were now commanded to subordinate their economic activities to the needs of colonialism. How? Produce what the colonialists wanted and buy what they produced”.
Enclave economy: “Hence, by 1962, you had what the University Scholars in the 1960s and 1970s were calling “enclave” economies – islands of pseudo-modernity – shops, nightclubs, vehicles, etc., not linked with the rest of the economy in a healthy sustainable way and surrounded by a sea of backwardness …”
Take-Off – after achieving minimum recovery and relative expansion of the enclave economy, and ensuring steady and sustained growth over decades: “Uganda economy is now poised to take off. Unlike in 1986, when we had a problem of shortages, one of our problems is now the unsold surpluses of sugar and sugar-cane; milk and milk products; surplus bananas; surplus maize; soon surplus cassava and cassava products; surplus industrial products – cement, steel products, blankets, tyres for piki pikis, ceramic tiles, etc., etc”.
Strategic Prosperity and Security of the African people: “It is not good that 63 years after Ghana’s Independence in 1957, most of the post-independence African leaders have created a Latin America in Africa instead of creating a United States of Africa in Africa, which was the vision of Osagyefo Nkrumah (for the whole of Africa) and for Mwalimu Nyerere (for the East African Federation)”.
Salutations must go to Mwalimu Nyerere and Sheikh Amani Karume that united to form the United Republic of Tanzania, the only example of successful political integration after Independence. I salute the East African leaders for being committed to the East African Confederation. The Africans, including Ugandans that care about the prosperity and security of Africa, should study this point very carefully”.
“The African race has no centre of gravity that can guarantee the future of the African race. East Africa can create one of these centres of gravity – given its uniqueness”.
David Mafabi
Senior Presidential Advisor/Special Duties
State House, 19th December 2020
